gnasher Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 [hv=pc=n&s=sj632h9864d2cak62&d=e&v=b&b=10&a=1dp1s2h5d]133|200[/hv]IMPs. What would you do? If you double, you'd better tell us what it means too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fluffy Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 did I say support with support?, This time I don;t have it that clear as it is quite possible that 5♦ and 5♥ are both down, but I'd hate to let the bidding die without supporting with this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 I think it's quite probable that both contracts are going down, but still will bid five hearts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 I wish to know the stle of East player. He did not open 5♦ , he obviously have better hand, or he probably found gold when his pd bid 1♠, or when my pd bid 2♥. I am not really sure if they are going down, hell i am not even pessimistic about our 5♥. Put me down for 5♥ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dake50 Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 Our auction blabbed HAQx winning for RHO.And his S-Qxx is working.Be glad he didn't hear his C-single/void makes 6D.Let's not push them into that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted March 10, 2013 Report Share Posted March 10, 2013 It's close but I think I would double (which I think is just penalty). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrAce Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 It's close but I think I would double (which I think is just penalty). What's your second choice Justin ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Siegmund Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 I would lead a club. I think it's close between doubling and passing. MP would tilt me toward doubling. I am not sure both contracts are down -- I've got enough hearts that my partner may not be winning a heart trick -- but anybody who thinks 5H has a prayer of making hasn't seen the hands my partners usually have for 2H in this spot. (Something like a chunky weak two seems to be a whole lot more common than the odd 15-pointer with 5 hearts.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLOGIC Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 What's your second choice Justin ? 5H, I would never pass personally...not in my DNA lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Codo Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Double would be penalty and I would choose it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Who is righty? What methods do they play? 5♦ is a lot of diamonds. Righty is likely to have a partial spade fit otherwise it makes no sense - maybe 3?8? distribution. If lefty has 4♠ bidding is no bargain, but if he has 5 spades, partner is likely 1624 or 1633 (this one could lead to an overruff in diamonds), which could mean that BOTH contracts could make opposite the ♥AK and the ♣Q. I've talked myself into 5♥. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trinidad Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Put me down for 5♥. I think that both will go down (RHO could have bid 3♥, but didn't) but I will not take the risk that one of them will make. Rik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 11, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Who is righty? What methods do they play?Nobody famous, playing Benjamin Acol. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 11, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Does anyone except me think that double should mean "I think we have a game-bonus to protect", rather than just being penalties? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Does anyone except me think that double should mean "I think we have a game-bonus to protect", rather than just being penalties?I wonder if this distinction is too subtle to be useful when we have to make a five-level decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Does anyone except me think that double should mean "I think we have a game-bonus to protect", rather than just being penalties? I can't speak for others, but I certainly don't want to play it that way. What you are saying is probably close to "I'd like to bid on unless you want to defend", but less constructively formulated. I would like to play this double for penalties though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilKing Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 I can't speak for others, but I certainly don't want to play it that way. What you are saying is probably close to "I'd like to bid on unless you want to defend", but less constructively formulated. I would like to play this double for penalties though. I'm going to guess Andy plays it as an 79, where that reflects the percentage of the time partner will leave it in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 Does anyone except me think that double should mean "I think we have a game-bonus to protect", rather than just being penalties?How would you define the situation in which this agreement applies? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Posted March 11, 2013 Report Share Posted March 11, 2013 How would you define the situation in which this agreement applies? It seems that it would apply when our side is suddenly jammed to a very high level and the person UTG hasn't had a chance to express that we have ownership (+) of the deck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
han Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 But gnasher's double doesn't show ownership, it is an "almost ownership"-double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 I can't speak for others, but I certainly don't want to play it that way. What you are saying is probably close to "I'd like to bid on unless you want to defend", but less constructively formulated. I would like to play this double for penalties though.I probably didn't explain it very well. I meant that the message would be "I was going to bid game to make (or maybe show a strong invitation), I think we have the high card strength to beat this, and I don't know whether we should bid on or not." That's probably the same as an "Ownership" or a "DSIP" double. How would you define the situation in which this agreement applies?How about this rule: it applies whenever the doubler is unlimited, it's possible for us to have game on, we're not in a forcing pass, and the double isn't defined as something else. I'm going to guess Andy plays it as an 79, where that reflects the percentage of the time partner will leave it in.That seems like a reasonable number. (By the way, have you inverted your classification method? I thought you defined them in terms of frequency of being taken out.) The actual hand was approximately:[hv=pc=n&s=sjxxxh98xxdxcakxx&w=skqtxxxhjdxxcjtxx&n=sxhakqxxxdqxcq9xx&e=saxhtxdakjtxxxxcx]399|300[/hv]which is remarkably close to one of PhilKing's constructions (though he didn't mention ♣9, which might be important against very good defenders). I bid 5♥ which made on a black-suit squeeze. Afterwards I commented that I if I'd doubled that would just have said we were making 4♥, and partner would have pulled because of his high ODR. Everyone nodded wisely, but they didn't look completely convinced. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 I bid 5♥ which made on a black-suit squeeze. Afterwards I commented that I if I'd doubled that would just have said we were making 4♥, and partner would have pulled because of his high ODR. Everyone nodded wisely, but they didn't look completely convinced.For a start it is non-trivial to make a double in tempo at the table - I'm sure most of us gave this hand some thought that probably exceeded ten seconds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gnasher Posted March 12, 2013 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 For a start it is non-trivial to make a double in tempo at the table - I'm sure most of us gave this hand some thought that probably exceeded ten seconds. Isn't that another argument for playing it as non-penalty? A slow "DSIP" double doesn't convey as much UI as a slow penalty double. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paulg Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 Isn't that another argument for playing it as non-penalty? A slow "DSIP" double doesn't convey as much UI as a slow penalty double.Isn't a slow DSIP double really showing han's penalty double :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lalldonn Posted March 12, 2013 Report Share Posted March 12, 2013 I want to know how gnasher would define it. i'm genuinely curious since it is an idea that may have merit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.